I didn’t get a chance to play any Warhammer at the shop on Sunday, which is fine, if not a bit dissapointing. Why start a campaign if people don’t expect to try to get games in. I did get over to a friends house and get a chance to play his new Logan list. Essentially it’s Logan Wing, but it’s 3 units of drop-pod dudes with both combi melta, and Combi Plasma, plus Logan in a Godhammer. Long story short, I nuked one unit, torrented one unit, and tankshocked the last one off the table while grimnar waited forever to come in from reserve.

Now for a quick rant. I was raise in a really competitive family. The terms “Practice like you play!” and “On the field, I don’t care if he’s your best friend, hit him in the mouth!” were commonly thrown around by my father, and easy to live by. The simple fact of the matter in my house-hold was that there was nothing more sacred than competition, and by not competing with every ounce of your soul, you were disrespecting your opponent.

When I was in Idaho, with DaMommasBoyz (Damommasboyz.com), I took the argument that one should always bring his best game, and that no strategy, or tactic, as long as it was legal, was out of the question. I very quickly was identified as TFG, by the guys who insist on playing a fluffy game, and the guys who play tournament style play wanted nothing to do with me, because I routinely beat them too. I could only get games from a very small portion of the people simply because I tried to hold every game to a tournament standard.

I took a lot of grief from a lot of people, and I had to do a lot of soul-searching. Trying to figure out why I couldn’t play my favorite game against all but a small selection of people. I had to come to a realization. The way I play the game is fun for me, and I sought to surround myself with people who think just like I do, and I stopped worrying about those who didn’t share my sense of competitiveness. While I enjoy a good story, I also seek to squeeze every drop from the fruit I’m given, so even in narrative based campaings, I do what I can to win as often as I can.

My best buddy summed it up perfectly at the time. “Of course I’m playing to win, that’s the point of the game.” When did that term become such an offensive term. Oh, don’t play him, he only plays to win… I’ve never met anyone that plays to lose. I have met a few people who play for a draw, but that’s a different rant.

So the question is: Is my way the right way? No, but I sure as hell have a whole lot more fun my way than anyone elses way. I guess that’s the lesson at the end of the day. This great game is a hobby, and it’s a multifaceted hobby. Take what you love and hold on with both hands, and don’t let anyone try to tell you how you should have fun with your game.

Going to head out to play some Warhammer at the shop today. Hoping to get some fantasy, even though it’s mostly 40k that gets played. Most importantly, I’m hoping to get something that smells like a game of Warhammer Fantasy. I’m bringing 2 lists because the Campaign lets you do crap like that:

This list sets out to take advantage of the fact that I have lots of little spammable spells. Hopefully I can punish a unit with my Fire-Synergy before running it over with my Chariots, and I can hold up whatever needs to be held up with my war-kitty.

I’m chilling out over on C9 and B9. With the intent to push that area pretty heavily. I fully intend to go after the Vampire Counts player in the C7 zone for 2 major reasons, I feel like I have a decided edge against him as a player, and I feel army versus army I have an edge too.

The Orcs army in my vicinity is also a decent player, but I feel like I can run him off the map pretty quickly. He’s pretty adverse to playing against me, so I think he’s going to give up most of his territory either lightly contested, or wholly uncontested.

I’m happiest about my placement, because I’m farthest away from the Empire player, and the Dwarf Player, both of which love to stand and shoot all day long. While the random battle-element of the campaign dictate that I should play them a couple of times, there’s no way I’ll be playing them consistently due to my map placement.

The Lizardmen player to my south really plays a mean game, but I feel like I can take care of him through experience, but it’s only one of 2 things I’m dissapointed with. The other thing I’m dissapointed with, is the placement of the Chaos player, I have a clear edge over him as a player, and he constructs armies so poorly that I have an edge over him there too. He needs serious luck to beat me, and even when things do go his way, he’s usually up against too much.

The terrain bonuses that I get on the map are:

Castle: +1 to deploy, scouts, and go first, but only if you have more castles than your opponent.

Wizards Tower: One character may know a random spell from the fire lore, and may cast it as a level 1 wizard. The kinds of dice advantages that I can create with powerdice screams “take advantage of me with the fire-ball ring, and Heirotitan.”

I’ve really been thinking quite a bit about my Tomb Kings army, and exactly how I want to run is as a competitive force. Now that we have 4 books out for Fantasy, I think that a very intriguing cross section can be taken from 8th edition to really see, and understand what sort of game mechanics that are going to be present moving forward.

While I haven’t had the chance to read the new Vampire Counts book, I have seen quite a few comparisons and lamentations out in the world of Warhammer Forums, and ultimately, several people look to my Tomb Kings, and lament their own armie’s short-comings when measured against the Khemrite book.

I refuse to give Cruddace any sort of due at this point, but I really wonder, if when the books are 50% out, if the Tomb Kings feel competitive, I may have to tip my hat.

Strategically, I’ve wondered if a Tomb Kings army needs to play “Inside out”. Which is to suggest that most armies, seem to want to play either a refused flank, or an infantry center with 2 mobile flanks (gunlines not withstanding). Unfortunately, the refused flank in its most traditional sense has gone out of favor, because it would rely on heavy cavalry, chariots, and other shock units to endeavor through brute force before turning the flank. Today’s Warhammer doesn’t really favor a cav versus infantry matchup favorably to the owner of the cavalry at all. So if a Tomb Kings army were to play “inside out” it would suggest that the chariots, snakes, and heavy cav, light cav, and warkitties would go centrally, and the infantry to the flanks. Perhaps a nasty unit of Tomb Guard on one side, and two largish bunker units to the other side. Ultimately, this army really can’t rely much on tactics, because all of the fastest units are in the center, and the flanks, where the tactics magic happens, are taken over by skeletons who move at the same rate as molasses in January. The strategy seems sound, though, using the grinder units as anvils, and then the flanking foot troops as hammers, where I have mitigated my opponents ability to attack back in any meaningful way, thus rendering crumble a moot argument. Also, should my opponent commit to my strategy in the same way, inside out, then my superior shock troops (seriously better than everyone but chaos really) can blow up the center, and then it’s flank city. The problem: Is expense. Tomb Kings armies don’t tend to have many units in them. I don’t know if it’s viable.